Case Document 3 Filed 05/16/16 Page 1 of 18 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA SOUTHERN DIVISION UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. CRIMINAL N0. 16-00095-CG OSCAR C. ANEZ, FILED UNDER SEAL Defendant. PLEA AGREEMENT The United States of America and Oscar C. Anez (?defendant?) hereby enter into the following Plea Agreement pursuant to Rule 1 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure R. Crim. RIGHTS OF DEFENDANT . The defendant understands his rights: to be represented by an attorney; to be charged by Indictment; to plead not guilty to any criminal charge brought against him; to have a trial by jury, at which he would be presumed not guilty ofthe charge and the United States would have to prove every essential element ofthe charged offense beyond a reasonable doubt for him to be found guilty; to confront and cross?examine witnesses against him and to Case Document 3 Filed 05/16/16 Page 2 of 18 subpoena witnesses in his defense at trial; not to be compelled to incriminate himself; to appeal his conviction, if he is found guilty; and to appeal the imposition of sentence against him. AGREEMENT TO PLEAD GUILTY AND WAIVE CERTAIN RIGHTS 2. The defendant knowingly and voluntarily waives the rights set out in Paragraph above. The defendant also knowingly and voluntarily waives the right to file any appeal, any collateral attack, or any other writ or motion, including but not limited to an appeal under 18 U.S.C. 3742 or a motion under 28 U.S.C. 2241 or 2255 that challenges the sentence imposed by the Court if that sentence is consistent with or below the recommended sentence in Paragraph 12 of this Plea Agreement, regardless of how the sentence is determined by the Court. The defendant further knowingly, voluntarily and expressly waives the right to raise any defense or objection based on the statute of limitations or any statutory or constitutional right to a speedy trial. This agreement does not affect the rights or obligations ofthe United States as set forth in 18 U.S.C. 3742(b). Nothing in this paragraph, however, shall act as a bar to the defendant perfecting any legal remedies he may otherwise have on appeal or collateral attack respecting claims of ineffective assistance of counsel or prosecutorial misconduct. The defendant agrees that he does not currently know ofany evidence of ineffective assistance of 7 Case Document 3 Filed 05/16/16 Page 3 of 18 counsel or prosecutorial misconduct. Pursuant to Fed. R. Crim. P. the defendant has waived indictment and is pleading guilty to a two-count Information. Count One of the Information charges the defendant with participating in a conSpiracy to suppress and eliminate competition by rigging bids for the purchase of real estate at public foreclosure auctions, beginning at least as early as March 2002, and continuing until at least November 2010, in violation of the Sherman Antitrust Act, 15 U.S.C. 1. Count Two ofthe Information charges the defendant with participating in a conspiracy to commit mail fraud in relation to real estate foreclosure auctions, beginning at least as early as March 2002, and continuing until at least November 2010, in violation of 18 U.S.C. 1349. 3. The defendant, pursuant to the terms of this Plea Agreement, will plead guilty to the criminal charges described in Paragraph 2 above and will make a factual admission of guilt to the Court in accordance with Fed. R. Crim. P. l, as set forth in the Factual Resume referenced in Paragraph 4 below. The United States agrees that at the arraignment, it will stipulate to the release of the defendant on his personal recognizance, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 3142, pending the sentencing hearing in this case. FACTUAL BASIS FOR OFFENSE CHARGED 4. A separate document, entitled Factual Resume, will be submitted to the Court as evidence at the plea hearing. The Factual Resume is incorporated by Case Document 3 Filed 05/16/16 Page 4 of 18 reference into this Plea Agreement. The defendant and the United States agree that the Factual Resume is true and correct. Alterations to the Plea Agreement or Factual Resume initialed only by the defendant and his counsel are not a part of this agreement and are not agreed to by the United States. POSSIBLE MAXIMUM SENTENCE 5. The defendant understands that the statutory maximum penalty which may be imposed against him upon conviction for a violation of Section One of the Sherman Antitrust Act, in Count One, is: a term ofimprisonment for ten (10) years (15 U.S.C. a fine in an amount equal to the greatest of( 1) $1 million, (2) twice the gross pecuniary gain the conspirators derived from the crime, or (3) twice the gross pecuniary loss caused to the victims of the crime by the conspirators (15 U.S.C. 1; 18 U.S.C. 3571(b) and and (C) a term of supervised release of three (3) years following any term of imprisonment. Ifthe defendant violates any condition of supervised release, the defendant could be required to serve up to two (2) years in prison (18 U.S.C. 3559(a)(3); 18 U.S.C. 3583(b)(2) and and United States Sentencing Guidelines ?Sentencing Guidelines,? or ??Guidelines?) Case Document 3 Filed 05/16/16 Page 5 of 18 6. The defendant understands that the statutory maximum penalty which may be imposed against him upon conviction for a violation of 18 U.S.C. 1349, in Count Two, is: a term of imprisonment for twenty (20) years (18 U.S.C. 1341); a fine in an amount equal to the greatest of(1) $250,000, (2) twice the pecuniary gain derived from the crime, or (3) twice the gross pecuniary loss caused to the victims ofthe crime (18 U.S.C. 3571(b) and and a term of supervised release of three (3) years following any term of imprisonment. If the defendant violates any condition of supervised release, the defendant could be required to serve up to two (2) years in prison (18 U.S.C. 3559(a)(3); 18 U.S.C. 3583(b)(2) and and U.S.S.G. 7. In addition, the defendant understands that: pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 3663A(c)(l)(A)(ii), the Court shall order the defendant to pay restitution to the victims of the charged Title 18 offense; and UI Case 1:16-cr-00095-CG Document 3 Filed 05/16/16 Page 6 of 18 pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 3013(a)(2)(A), the Court is required to order the defendant to pay a $100.00 special assessment upon conviction for each charged crime, totaling $200.00. SENTENCING GUIDELINES 8. The defendant understands that the Sentencing Guidelines are advisory, not mandatory, but that the Court must consider the Guidelines in effect on the day of sentencing, along with the other factors set forth in 18 U.S.C. 3553(a), in determining and imposing sentence. The defendant understands that the Guidelines determinations will be made by the Court by a preponderance of the evidence standard. The defendant understands that although the Court is not ultimately bound to impose a sentence within the applicable Guidelines range, its sentence must be reasonable based upon consideration of all relevant sentencing factors set forth in 18 U.S.C. 3553(3). Pursuant to U.S.S.G. ?1Bl.8, the United States agrees that self-incriminating information that the defendant provides to the United States pursuant to this Plea Agreement will not be used to increase the volume of affected commerce or fraud loss attributable to the defendant or in determining the defendant?s applicable Guidelines range, except to the extent provided in U.S.S.G. ?lBl 9. The United States and the defendant agree that volume of commerce attributable to the defendant is $589,095.00 and that the fraud loss attributable to Case Document 3 Filed 05/16/16 Page 7 of 18 the defendant is $742,965.84. Based on the stipulated volume of commerce and fraud loss amounts, the following sentencing guidelines apply: For Count One (15 U.S.C. 1) i. Base Offense Level, U.S.S.G. ?2R1.1(a) 12 ii. Conduct involved agreement to submit non?competitive bids, U.S.S.G. +1 Volume of commerce adjustment, U.S.S.G. ?2Rl .1 +0 iv. Fine calculated as one to five percent of the volume of commerce to $29,454.75) but not less than $20,000, see U.S.S.G. Offense Level Total: 13 For Count Two (18 U.S.C. 1349) i. Base Offense Level, U.S.S.G. ?2Bl 7 ii. Loss $550,000, U.S.S.G. +14 10 or more victims, U.S.S.G. +2 iv. Fine, U.S.S.G. $7,500 to $75,000 Offense Level Total: 23 Case Document 3 Filed 05/16/16 Page 8 of 18 Pursuant to U.S.S.G. and 3D1.3, the counts involved offenses of the same general type to which different Guidelines apply; therefore the offense Guideline to be applied is the highest offense level. For the purposes of U.S.S.G. . l, a 3?level reduction ofthe offense level for the defendant?s acceptance of responsibility is appropriate. However, should the United States obtain or receive additional evidence or information prior to sentencing that, in its sole discretion, it determines to be credible and materially in conflict with this stipulation, then the United States shall no longer be bound by this stipulation; The United States and the defendant are not aware of any information that would affect the defendant?s Criminal History Category. If no other information were discovered, the defendant?s Criminal History Category would be I. The parties understand that the defendant?s Criminal History Category is determined by the Court. 10. The defendant understands that the Court will impose the sentence in this case. The defendant has reviewed the application ofthe Guidelines with his attorney and understands that no one can predict with certainty what the sentencing range will be in this case until after a pre-sentence investigation has been completed and the Court has ruled on the results ofthat investigation. Case Document 3 Filed 05/16/16 Page 9 of 18 l. The defendant understands that the United States will provide all relevant sentencing information to the Probation Of?ce for purposes of the pre- sentence investigation. Relevant sentencing information includes, but is not limited to, all facts and circumstances of this case and information concerning the defendant?s conduct and background. SENTENCING AGREEMENT 12. Pursuant to Fed. R. Crim. P. the United States agrees that it will recommend, as the appropriate disposition of this case, that the Court impose a sentence at the lower end of the sentencing range of Offense Level 17. The United States agrees that the defendant may recommend the imposition of any sentence based upon 18 U.S.C. 3553(a). The defendant understands that the United States may oppose any sentence recommended by the defendant that is less than 24 months of imprisonment. The United States and the defendant agree to recommend jointly that the Court impose a ?ne of $20,000 payable in full before the ?fteenth (15th) day after the date of judgment, and require the defendant to pay restitution in an amount not less than $349,368.15 pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 3556 and The terms contained in this paragraph above constitute ?the recommended sentence.? The defendant understands that the Court will order him to pay a $200 special assessment pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 3013(a)(2)(A) in addition to any restitution imposed. The United States will not object to the defendant?s Case 1:16-cr-00095-CG Document 3 Filed 05/16/16 Page 10 of 18 request that the Court make a recommendation to the Bureau of Prisons that the Bureau of Prisons designate that the defendant be assigned to a Federal Minimum Security Camp to serve any sentence of imprisonment and that the defendant be released following the imposition of sentence to allow him to self-surrender to the assigned prison facility on a speci?ed date. The parties agree that there exists no aggravating or mitigating circumstance of a kind, or to a degree, not adequately taken into consideration by the US. Sentencing Commission in formulating the Sentencing Guidelines justifying a departure pursuant to U.S.S.G. 13. The Guidelines Offense Level in Paragraph 9 above exceeds the term of imprisonment that the United States will recommend pursuant to Paragraph 12 above. Subject to the full, truthful, and continuing cooperation ofthe defendant, as defined in Paragraph 16 of this Plea Agreement, and prior to sentencing in this case, the United States agrees that it will make a motion, pursuant to U.S.S.G. ?5Kl . l, for a downward departure from the Guidelines imprisonment range in this case of at least three (3) levels because of the defendant?s substantial assistance in the government's investigation and prosecutions of violations of federal criminal law involving the purchase of real estate at public foreclosure auctions in Alabama, and any other federal investigation resulting therefrom. The United States agrees that it will also consider the defendant?s assistance with any investigation by the Case 1:16-cr-00095-CG Document 3 Filed 05/16/16 Page 11 of 18 Antitrust Division of anticompetitive conduct at real estate foreclosure auctions conducted outside of Alabama. 14. Subject to the full, truthful, and continuing cooperation of the defendant as de?ned in Paragraph 16 of this Plea Agreement, and prior to sentencing in this case, the United States will fully advise the Court and the Probation Office of the fact, manner, and extent of the defendant?s cooperation and his commitment to prospective cooperation with the United States? investigation and prosecutions, all material facts relating to the defendant?s involvement in the charged offenses, and all other relevant conduct. The United States agrees that it will also advise the Court and the Probation Office ofthe defendant?s assistance with any investigation by the Antitrust Division of anticompetitive conduct at public real estate foreclosure auctions conducted outside of Alabama. To enable the Court to have the bene?t ofall relevant sentencing information, the United States may request, and the defendant will not oppose, that sentencing be postponed until his cooperation is complete. 15. The United States and the defendant understand that the Court retains complete discretion to accept or reject the recommended sentence provided for in Paragraph 12 of this Plea Agreement. The defendant understands that, as provided in Fed. R: Crim. P. ifthe Court does not impose a sentence consistent Case 1:16-cr-00095-CG Document 3 Filed 05/16/16 Page 12 of 18 with the recommended sentence contained in this Agreement, he nevertheless has no right to withdraw his plea of guilty. DEF COOPERATION 16. The defendant will cooperate fully and truthfully with the United States in the prosecution of this case, the conduct of the current federal investigation of violations of federal antitrust and related criminal laws involving the purchase of real estate at public foreclosure auctions in Alabama, any other federal investigation resulting therefrom, and any litigation or other proceedings arising or resulting from any such investigation to which the United States is a party (?Federal Proceeding?). The full, truthful, and continuing cooperation of the defendant shall include, but not be limited to: producing all non?privileged documents, including claimed personal documents, and other materials, wherever located, in the possession, custody, or control of the defendant, requested by attorneys and agents ofthe United States; making himself available for interviews, not at the expense of the United States, upon the request of attorneys and agents of the United States; responding fully and truthfully to all inquiries ofthe United Case 1:16-cr-00095-CG Document 3 Filed 05/16/16 Page 13 of 18 States in connection with any Federal Proceeding, without falsely implicating any person or intentionally withholding any information, subject to the penalties of making false statements (18 U.S.C. 1001) and obstruction ofjustice (18 U.S.C. 1503, et seq); otherwise voluntarily providing the United States with any non-privileged material or information, not requested in ofthis paragraph, that he may have that is related to any Federal Proceeding; and when called upon to do so by the United States in connection with any Federal Proceeding, testifying in grand jury, trial, and other judicial proceedings, fully, truthfully, and under oath, subject to the penalties of perjury (18 U.S.C. 1621), making false statements or declarations in grand jury or court proceedings (18 U.S.C. 1623), contempt 8 U.S.C. 401 - 402), and obstruction ofjustice (l8 U.S.C. 1503, et seq). AGREEMENT 17. Subject to the full, truthful, and continuing cooperation of the defendant, as de?ned in Paragraph 16 of this Plea Agreement, and upon the Court?s acceptance of the guilty plea called for by this Plea Agreement and the imposition of sentence, the United States will not bring further criminal charges against the defendant for any act or offense committed before the date ofthis Plea Agreement that was undertaken in furtherance ofan antitrust conSpiracy or l3 Case 1:16-cr-00095-CG Document 3 Filed 05/16/16 Page 14 of 18 fraudulent conduct involving the purchase of real estate at public foreclosure auctions in Alabama (?Relevant Offense?). The non-prosecution terms of this paragraph do not apply to civil matters of any kind, to any violation of the federal tax or securities laws, or to any crime of violence. REPRESENTATION BY COUNSEL 18. The defendant has reviewed all legal and factual aspects of this case with his attorney and is fully satis?ed with his attorney?s legal representation. The defendant has thoroughly reviewed this Plea Agreement with his attorney and has received satisfactory explanations from his attorney concerning each paragraph of this Plea Agreement and alternatives available to the defendant other than entering into this Plea Agreement. After conferring with his attorney and considering all available alternatives, the defendant has made a knowing and voluntary decision to enter into this Plea Agreement. VOLUNTARY PLEA 19. The defendant?s decision to enter into this Plea Agreement and to tender a plea of guilty is freely and voluntarily made and is not the result of force, threats, assurances, promises, or representations other than the representations contained in this Plea Agreement. The United States has made no promises or representations to the defendant as to whether the Court will accept or reject the recommendations contained within this Plea Agreement. 14 Case 1:16-cr-00095-CG Document 3 Filed 05/16/16 Page 15 of 18 VIOLATION OF PLEA AGREEMENT 20. The defendant agrees that, should the United States determine in good faith, during the period that any Federal Proceeding is pending, that the defendant has failed to provide full, truthful, and continuing cooperation, as de?ned in Paragraph 16 of this Plea Agreement, or has otherwise violated any provision of this Plea Agreement, the United States will notify the defendant or his counsel in writing by personal or overnight delivery or facsimile transmission and may also notify his counsel by telephone of its intention to void any of its obligations under this Plea Agreement (except its obligations under this paragraph), and the defendant shall be subject to prosecution for any federal crime of which the United States has knowledge including, but not limited to, the substantive offenses relating to the investigation resulting in this Plea Agreement. The defendant agrees that, in the event that the United States is released from its obligations under this Plea Agreement and brings criminal charges against the defendant for any Relevant Offense, the statute of limitations period for such offense shall be tolled for the period between the date of the signing of this Plea Agreement and six (6) months after the date the United States gave notice of its intent to void its obligations under this Plea Agreement. Case 1:16-cr-00095-CG Document 3 Filed 05/16/16 Page 16 of 18 21. The defendant understands and agrees that in any further prosecution of him resulting from the release of the United States from its obligations under this Plea Agreement based on the defendant?s violation of the Plea Agreement, any documents, statements, information, testimony, or evidence provided by him to attorneys or agents of the United States, federal grand juries, or courts, and any leads derived therefrom, may be used against him in any such further prosecution. In addition, the defendant unconditionally waives his right to challenge the use of such evidence in any such further prosecution, notwithstanding the protections of Fed. R. Evid. 410. ENTIRETY OF AGREEMENT 22. This Plea Agreement and its incorporated Factual Resume constitute the entire agreement between the United States and the defendant concerning the disposition of the criminal charges in this case. This Plea Agreement cannot be modified except in writing, signed by the United States and the defendant. 23. The undersigned attorneys for the United States have been authorized by the Attorney General of the United States to enter this Plea Agreement on behalf ofthe United States. 16 Case 1:16-cr-00095-CG Document 3 Filed 05/16/16 Page 17 of 18 Respectfully submitted, KENYEN R. BROWN UNITED STATES ATTORNEY Daten? [526301 Deana L. Timberlake- Wil Trial Attorney Antitrust Division United States Department of Justice /774/ Susan A. Musser Susan.Musser@usdoi.gov Trial Attorney Antitrust Division United States Department of Justice Case 1:16-cr-00095-CG Document 3 Filed 05/16/16 Page 18 of 18 I have consulted with my counsel and fully understand all my rights with respect to the offenses charged in the Information pending against me. I have read this Plea Agreement and carefully reviewed every part of it with my attorney. I understand this agreement, and I voluntarily agree to it. I hereby stipulate that the Factual Resume, incorporated herein, is true and accurate in every respect, and that had the matter proceeded to trial, the United States could have proved the same beyond a reasonable doubt. Oscar C. Anez Defendant Date: I am the attorney for the defendant. I have fully explained his rights to him with respect to the offenses charged in the Information in this matter. I have carefully reviewed every part of this Plea Agreement with him. To my knowledge, his decision to enter into this agreement is an informed and voluntary one. I have carefully reviewed the Factual Resume, incorporated herein, with the defendant and to my knowledge, his decision to stipulate to the facts is an informed, intelligent and voluntary one. Date: 4 43 75 5- Dennis J. Knizley Attorney for Defendant diknizle?ihotmailcom 18 Case Document 3-1 Filed 05/16/16 Page 1 of 7 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA SOUTHERN DIVISION UNITED STATES OF AMERICA CRIMINAL NO. 16-00095-CG v. FILED UNDER SEAL OSCAR C. ANEZ, Defendant. FACTUAL RESUME The defendant, Oscar C. Anez, admits the allegations of the Information. ELEMENTS OF THE OFFENSES The defendant understands that in order to prove a violation of Title 15, United States Code, Section 1, as charged in Count One of the Information, the United States must prove: First: There was a combination or conspiracy to restrain trade during the time alleged in the Information; Second: The defendant knowingly joined the conspiracy; and Third: The activity was in the ?ow of or substantially affected interstate or foreign commerce. The defendant understands that in order to prove a violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section 1349, as charged in Count Two of the Information, the United States must prove: Case Document 3-1 Filed 05/16/16 Page 2 of 7 First: Second: Two or more persons, in some way or manner, agreed to try to accomplish a common and unlawful plan to commit mail fraud; and The defendant knew the unlawful purpose of the plan and willfully joined in it. The defendant understands that the elements of the underlying offense of mail fraud, Title 18, United States Code, Section 1341, are as follows: First: Second: Third: Fourth: The defendant knowingly devised or participated in a scheme to defraud someone, or obtain money or property, using false and fraudulent pretenses, representations, or promises; The false and fraudulent pretenses, representations, or promises were about a material fact; The defendant intended to defraud someone; and The defendant used the United States Postal Service and private or commercial interstate carriers by mailing, or by causing to be mailed, something meant to help carry out the scheme to defraud. OFFENSE CONDUCT The defendant admits in open court and under oath that the following statement is true and correct and constitutes evidence in this case. This statement of facts is provided solely to assist the Court in determining whether a factual basis exists for the defendant?s plea of guilty. The statement of facts does not contain each and every fact known to the defendant and to the United States concerning the defendant?s involvement in the charges set forth in the plea agreement. Case Document 3-1 Filed 05/16/16 Page 3 of 7 When Alabama homeowners default on their mortgages, the lender or loan servicer can institute foreclosure proceedings through a non-judicial public foreclosure auction (?public auction?). These public auctions typically take place at the county courthouse. At the public auction, an auctioneer places the opening bid. Bidders are expected to bid against each other in increasing amounts. The auctioneer sells the property to the bidder offering the highest bid amount. Proceeds from the sale are then used to pay off the mortgage and other debt attached to the property. Any remaining proceeds are paid to the homeowner. For the purposes of this Factual Resume, the ?relevant period? is that period beginning at least as early as March 2002, and continuing until at least November 2010.1 During the relevant period, the defendant was engaged in the business of buying real estate at public auctions in the Southern District of Alabama and rehabilitating, renting or selling the foreclosure properties for a profit. At times, the defendant engaged in this business as a sole proprietor doing business as Anez Investments, Inc. and other af?liated companies. COUNT ONE During the relevant period, the defendant agreed to refrain from bidding against one or more other potential bidders at public auctions in order to suppress During plea negotiations, the parties executed two agreements that tolled the statute oflimitations. 3 Case Document 3-1 Filed 05/16/16 Page 4 of 7 or eliminate competition at the public auctions, and to obtain title to foreclosure properties at a suppressed price (?rigged foreclosure properties?). For example, in January 2007, the defendant rigged the public auction for a residential property located in Mobile, Alabama. Before the public auction, the defendant and his co-conspirators indicated to each other their interest in purchasing the property and agreed not to bid against each other. Defendant Chad Foster was designated by the group to bid on the property at the public auction. Defendant Foster was the highest bidder and none of the other co-conspirators bid at the public auction at the Mobile County courthouse. Defendant Foster took title to the property and made payoffs to defendant Anez, defendant Harold Buchman and another co-conspirator. The suppressed auction proceeds were collected by the trustee from defendant Foster and sent to the foreclosing lender in Irving, Texas. As a result of the suppressed auction price caused by the defendant and his co-conspirators, the foreclosing lender suffered an actual monetary loss (more than $25,000) and there were no surplus funds to be paid to the homeowner. COUNT TWO During the relevant period, the defendant and his co-conspirators conspired to knowingly devise and participate in a scheme to defraud financial institutions, homeowners, and others with a legal interest in rigged foreclosure properties, and Case Document 3-1 Filed 05/16/16 Page 5 of 7 to obtain money and property by materially false and fraudulent pretenses, representations or promises. The conspirators executed the scheme to defraud by, among other things: I) agreeing not to bid against one another at the public auctions; 2) purchasing auctioned real estate at a lower price than would have been possible during a competitive auction process; 3) making payoffs to co-conspirators to obtain title to selected real estate at fraudulently suppressed prices; 4) receiving payoffs in exchange for not bidding to allow title to selected real estate to be obtained at fraudulently suppressed prices; 5) causing fraudulently suppressed purchase prices to be reported and paid to financial institutions and others with a legal interest in select properties, and 6) making and causing to be made materially false and fraudulent pretenses to trustees and others involved in the auction and sale of the foreclosed properties. The defendant and others, for the purpose of executing or attempting to execute the scheme to defraud described above, knowingly used and caused to be used the United States Postal Service or private or commercial interstate carriers. In furtherance of the scheme to defraud, the defendant participated in secret, second auctions for the rigged foreclosure properties that were only open to members of the conspiracy. The highest bidder at the second auction won the Case 1:16-cr-00095-CG Document 3-1 Filed 05/16/16 Page 6 of 7 rigged foreclosure property and made payoffs to the other members of the conspiracy who agreed not to bid at the public auction. For example, in February 2007, the defendant and three co-conspirators agreed not to bid against each other at a public auction for a property located in Mobile, Alabama. Defendant Anez (doing business as Anez Investments, Inc.) was the highest bidder at the public auction for the arti?cially suppressed auction price of $57,354.00. Defendant Anez, defendant Harold Buchman, defendant Michael Barbour and another co-conspirator conducted a secret, second auction where defendant Buchman won title to the property as the highest bidder. Defendant Buchman (as an agent for defendant Builders, LLC) made payoffs totaling $3072.50 to the three other conspirators who rigged the auction, including 3 $1000.00 payoff to defendant Anez. The trustee deeded the property to Anez Investment, Inc. who then issued 3 Warranty Deed to Builders, LLC. The debt owed to the foreclosing lender, Wells Fargo Bank, NA, was at least $81,466.60 at the time of the auction. Thus, the ?nancial institution suffered an actual monetary loss. The auction proceeds were mailed to the lender. Mailings such as these were knowingly caused by the defendant and his co-conspirators and were foreseeable to the defendant and his co?conspirators in the ordinary course of business. Case Document 3-1 Filed 05/16/16 Page 7 of 7 Date: 5 5190M Date: 52 Date: is AGREED TO AND SIGNED. Respectfully submitted, KENYEN R. BROWN UNITED STATES ATTORNEY Ikana L. Timberlake-Wile? Trial Attorney Antitrust Division United States Department of Justice Six. /?wr.et 404/ Susan A. Musser Trial Attorney Antitrust Division United States Department of Justice Susan.Musser@usdoi.gov @1126 Oscar C. Anez Defendant Dennis J. Knizley Attorney for Defendant\ diknizley??hotmailcom